R33_Dude

Everyone complains about VL bogans, however the clean ones (like that one) look bloody nice...

At the risk of getting shot. *dons flame suit of +5 fire resistance* I wouldn't consider putting an RB26 into anything other than a GTR or GTS4. Too costly to maintain. Oil problems. Damaged bearings are damn common. On a plus side heaps of aftermarket support. You want to do an engine swap into something different? Well its going to be hard anyhow if the engine doesn't belong there. Just be done with it and use a 2JZ-GTE or twin turbo/supercharge a 1UZ-FE.

Hmm thats a pretty good effort! This happenned to me once, I said screw it, cracked out the paint stripper and primer and got an uncle to spray paint it. Then I looked at the other panels and realised the bonnet looked better than the rest of the car. It turned into a full body respray :s

Thanks for the very informative post benkoau. I have never heard of this model before. Perhaps try PM'ing Iron Chef. He imports and otherwise wrangles cars from Japan so he may be able to help you.

Burn the witch! Burn the witch! *rabble rabble rabble rabble* Meh. Its just one blokes opinion. Pretty much every motoring journo except for him loves the R35.

Spotted a white R33, no front bumper, big front mount in Burnie today. Unfortunately it was being towed by a tow truck. Poor b*stard...

Getting the horsepower from a supercharger isn't the problem. Getting the horsepower from a low compression engine to turn the supercharger to begin with will be a problem. Maybe I should get all of my engineering/car manual stuff out and write up a FAQ on superchargers. It sure would stop a lot of speculation... Hell I'm going to do it. EDIT: Oh and superchargers don't neccessarily make linear power gains. Centrifugal superchargers have a somewhat similar power curve to a turbo due to their design. Hell don't worry I'll write this FAQ up and be done with it.

I do believe that a twin turbo Ferrari 335 is around... *Digs around on the interblags* Ah here it is! http://www.autospeed.com/cms/A_2699/article.html

^^ Yeah thats one of the big points to be made however I want to avoid the implication that Targa and so-called "hoons" are related. So I won't be making the point of people still driving the roads if Targa is cancelled. There definitely is a conection between the people opposing logging and the people opposing Targa from a psychological perspective - not necessarily that I am trying to make the two groups one and the same - in that they are against the profit made, don't know all the facts, have probably never witnessed the event in question and so on. However again I won't approach this topic because its just finge pointing against a group. That would achieve nothing , it needs to be an unbiased, non finger pointing letter.

The premier being in a Targa stage is a problem though. It means that he is more likely to bow to political pressure because he has a personal involvement. The population here is a bunch of generally recalcitrant conservatives, so in order to make any kind of impact its best to get your shots off early before it turns into a demanding mob.

Thats correct. The government report shows that Targa Tasmania generates an economic influx up to $12,000,000 - thats a combination of driver/team spending, visitor influx, increased public spending and various other factors. Needless to say it generates a huge amount of profit for the (honestly rather small) Tasmanian economy. I thought spectators did die a few years ago. Perhaps they were only injured. I am still undergoing research for the article, I want it to be as concise, factual and to the point as possible. As of yet its still in draft form and it may take many, many drafts before I am happy with it. Thats a good point as well about the people who sabotage the stages or attack cars. I will try and write that in.

Recently there has been a lot of activity in the local Tasmanian newspapers about so-called public outcry over letting Targa Tasmania continue (in particular todays Advocate). The main objections seem to be: the danger and deaths suffered by competitors (a grand total of one), the danger and deaths suffered by spectators, the government funding of the event itself ($260,000 per annum), the way the event "encourages hooning" and the biggest stab of all seems to be that it is a "rich mans sport filled with exotic cars". It is my intent to write a letter addressing some these concerns. It is still in draft form but here are some of the counter arguments I have. Firstly I will show that the deaths and injuries suffered over the course of Targa Tasmanias history is absolutely minimal. One driver death and many injuries, the several spectator deaths occured mostly due to spectators standing where race marshals told them not to go i.e. the outside of corners. In comparison I look at the many deaths at Bathurst, the local track at Symmons Plains, and virtually any other "proper" track around the world from Laguna Seca in the USA to the Nurburghring in Germany. All have had more deaths in the same period as Targa Tasmania - vastly more in some cases. Those racetracks have not been closed nor has it been suggested that they should be closed. In terms of spectator deaths, if a spectator ignores course marshal instructions and stands on the outside edge of a wet corner covered in gravel just to get a better picture who is to blame? Also it needs to be said that ANY sport or high risk activity will have deaths and injuries from boxing, to diving with sharks or parachuting, to martial arts to even crossing the road without looking at the traffic. The Targa cars have roll cages, CAM's approved safety equipment and marshals and emergency personnel on hand if something does go wrong. While any death or injury in motorsport is a tragic loss it is accepted that when you compete things may go wrong. The next point, the government funding of Targa, is an interesting one. The Tasmanian government puts $260,000 dollars a year into Targa Tasmania. In return the expected return from this years event (despite having fewer competitors than years gone by) will be in the vicinity of 11 to 12 million dollars. With all the zeros attached that is $12,000,000. Which equates to a $46 dollar return for each dollar invested or in percentages a 4600% profit per dollar. There is no business in the world that isn't illegal that can turn such a profit from such a minimal amount of money. Now there is the "encourages hooning" side of things. This I am a little stumped on how to respond to but nevertheless I will attempt it. What factual evidence is there to support the claim that Targa Tasmania encourages hooning? While the Targa is in progress do police arrests for motor vehicle offences rise? Apparantly not - or at least not in any perceptible manner. How many of the spectators after watching targa go and get in their cars and attempt to emulate the drivers in Targa? Next to none I would bet. Do the V8 supercar events encourage hooning? Does the ANDRA drag racing encourage hooning? Formula 1? The answer is that if it does it would be minor. Young people have always driven cars hard , fast and recklessly. Dare I say that when cars didn't exist they rode their horses hard, fast and recklessly. The best way to counter hooning is to provide greater driver training - for instance government subsidised defensive driving courses, compulsary driving lessons on skid pans etc. Not fining people for ridiculous offenses (my favourite being excessive accelleration which is judged at officer discretion). Finally there is the quip that Targa is a "Rich Mans Sport". Yes it is true that you need a decent amount of money to compete in Targa even if you drive a cheapy. However ANY sport at a high enough level has huge costs associated with it - soccer, AFL, cricket, go-karting you name it. Of course this isn't how its phrased in the letter (I will post it up for examination once its finished) but it is the essence of my objections to some of the media opinions and even some politicians opinions. What I would like is the opinions of some of the Targa competitors on this site. Do you have anything that you could add? Oh and the formatting of the letter is in two parts. The first is a short answer suitable for an editorial column the second is a full letter. It will be sent to several local papers and perhaps larger newspapers. If I have anything else I want to add I will post it up here. I think it would be best to counter these assaults on this famous race before it starts to gain political swing. Its easier to get involved now than show apathy. Cheers.

Watched the lot of you noisy buggers driving past my house today Spotted a certain white R34 GTR among the masses of porsches.

Ah piss off all of you. Thats the comparison thats been going on for the last couple of pages. You come on a skyline forum and ask us about cars and (surprise surprise) you get an overwhelming response that (wow) skyline is the way to go. If the same question was asked on the WRX forums the inverse would be true. Congratulations assymmetry - your an idiot. Hope thats going well for you. I was in fact referring to the C-RED Evo. Pick up HPI No. 95. Tell me that isn't a good looking car with amazing performance in that package. Sh*t don't get me wrong - fair enough you like your rex. Good on you - I can appreciate what they can do. I just don't prefer them to most other cars in the same price bracket. Just as you probably won't understand why I built a 500 horsepower carb fed V8 instead of building a boxer engine. Take your panties and untwist them. *walks away from thread never to return*

I have been giving this whole WRX vs Skyline vs Evo thing a but of thought. I will make this clear it comes down to personal preference really but having extensively driven all of them (over quite a long period of time though so I'm just going on my memories and a bit of normal everyday knowlege) here are my opinions: WRX (STi or not): Upsides: A good everyday car that can be modified to have a good bit of power. The six speed boxes as someone said are incredibly strong. Great grip, fun on the twisties. Good at track days. Massive aftermarket support. Downsides: Most of the WRX's with the five speed gearboxes are NOT incredibly strong. When you put a proper exhaust on them they sound like a two stroke motorcycle. Everyone owns one and so does their children. Skyline GT-ST (lets say R33 their the most common): Upsides: A good everyday car that can be modified to have a good bit of power. Gearbox is very strong. Great in a straight line. Fun at track days. Massive aftermarket support. Women love skylines. Cheap now and in twelve months they'll be cheaper again. Downsides: No AWD grip. Beaten through twisty roads by an Evo or WRX unless you modify like crazy. Too many bogans with them now. The police love to hate you. Depreciates like a biatch. Evo (say VII): Upsides: A great weekend thrasher. Brilliant in a straight line. Brilliant around corners. Brilliant at a track even stock. Massive aftermarket support. Reasonably rare - hardly any around compared to skylines or WRX's. Insane grip. Has been raced in everything from Targa Tasmania to superlap to whatever else you care to name. Downsides: While the gearboxes are better than Subaru's they are still kind of weak. The one I drove had very hard suspension - wouldn't like to use it everyday. Tad expensive compared to a WRX. My choice? Well, in terms of car per dollar the Skyline is ahead. Evo's frequently fetch prices well over $25k (the same money could sit you in a fairly well looked after R33 GTR) and WRX's are a tad more expensive than Skylines (unless you want one of those hideous bug eye ones - bleergh). If you can put up with them being common now and find one in good condition that hasn't been thrashed every single day of its life ('cause lets face it everyone thrashes their car at some point) you have yourself a brilliant car. If I had more money to spend I would step into an Evo. And the WRX? Well, honestly I can't stand that engine note.

Woah long time since I started this thread. No i didn't. I dug around on the cars history via forums and it turned out to have been thrashed in every way imaginable with some below average repair jobs... So I'm still searching quietly. If something comes up it comes up. I would like to find a supercharged AW11 MR2 though - their certainly cheap enough - get a new pulley to up the boost, sort out the suspension plus their already bloody light strip what little there is of the interior and your off. Hilarious car to drive stock through twisty roads

That is some insane engineering. The team behind that car have amazing skills and must have amazing connections to get a hold of a koeniggseggseggseggvikinggabbaseg engine.

I wish people would actually contribute to this thread as opposed for just ranting, raving and picking sides. For f*ck sake its not hard to make a post informative at the same time as making a point.

Pretty much as title says. I am after a T28 to suit a pulsar GTiR exhaust manifold (may consider T25), prefer little/no shaft play and otherwise in good condition. I can be contacted preferably in this thread or via PM. Cheers

Don't get me wrong I want to see how this project turns out. I'm very interested. I just want to make sure she has all the facts first.

I realise they are different. I was pointing out to someone who posted earlier on as to why you would use a centrifugal supercharger. I will say this, and I will say this clearly: Centrifugal superchargers experience lag. On small capacity applications they only reach usable boost (psi gained minus rotational force required) at around three thousand rpm. Here are some references to prove what I am saying: "Due to its design and lack of low-RPM boost it is often employed on near-standard compression engines" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_supercharger "One of the disadvantages of the centrifugal supercharger is that the centrifugal compressor works best over a rather small RPM range" - Sport Compact Car Engine & Driveline Handbook (You would have to buy this or look it up on google books. Page 27, near the bottom.) It is also in my engineering book on superchargers, I would scan it up for you but alas I have no scanner at the moment and the book is packed away with about a million others. It says something along the lines of centrifugal superchargers building boost with RPM, however lag conditions are created at low RPM, hence why they can be used on mechanically standard engines as the volumetric efficiency of an engine falls when RPM rises. Thus the supercharger compensates by increasing air flow at higher RPM improving power, response and torque throughout the upper mid range and top end. Essentially a supercharger isn't a supercharger. Screw superchargers produce constant boost. Roots superchargers produce boost down low but seem to lose steam at the top end (quite inefficient too). Centrifugal suffers at the bottem end but the trade off is top end. EDIT: I have another quote from Sports Compact Car Engine and Driveline Handbook: "Thus even though the centrifugal supercharger is connected to the crankshaft, it still suffers from power lag, a non-linear power delivery sometimes worse than that of even a fairly aggressive, large sized turbo." HOWEVER "Centrifugal superchargers are more thermally efficient than the roots blower" Just as I have been saying all along. But no I can't be right.

Well there are two main problems with a vortech supercharger the first is lag, just like a turbo and the other is the considerable mechanical effort required to turn the supercharger. Advantages are that they are compact, the boost increases at higher rpm so as to maximise the power adding potential, and they are incredibly efficient compared to roots and screw type superchargers. They are also quite cheap compared to a roots or screw. If it was my money I would be doing something totally different, but its not its hers and I am intruiged by this whole project honestly because its not what i would do. Cara, he did ask a simple question and its quite an easy one to answer - retract the claws. EDIT: Also I just read your comment about there not being much lag due to tune. The only way to reduce lag on a supercharger is to increase rotational speed - i.e. increase engine rpm. Its not a turbo, tune won't help.

Superchargers are somewhat of a passion of mine (albeit on V8's) so bear with me. I assume then its not a roots, roots superchargers produce constant boost over any rpm. Vortech superchargers don't actually have a progressive power build. If you compare dyno graphs between a high powered vortech supercharged engine and a turbocharged engine theres not much difference in power delivery. The boost builds with RPM until peak boost is achieved. Vortech superchargers don't have lag as such but there is a hole where there is very little boost - too low to counter the power robbing effect of the supercharger, thus creating what feels like lag. Fair enough then, if its not your daily driver and you have a skilled team on your hands you will be fine. What is the expected finishing time? I will definitely be checking it out at the next autosalon you take it along to.

I will be following this project very closely. A few serious questions though. The vortech style blower you will be using will have an extremely strong power robbing effect on the engine - what is the mimimum crank horsepower that will be needed to turn such a powerful supercharger? The reason I ask is that built supercharged V8's have the torque and power from a larger capacity engine in order to utilise powerful superchargers. A stroked RB is quite small for that horsepower level. Also using this type of supercharger misses out on the traditional low down power and torque supplied by a roots blower due to its design. Essentially this means that while the supercharger builds boost you will experience lag, just as if you built a RB to 750 horsepower turbocharged. I assume you have factored this into the build and know full well that this type of supercharger provides boost in this manner? The last thing is that a 750 horsepower engine is not fun on the street - despite what others may say. A supercharged car will have as many hassles being driven at this power level as a turbocharged car - that is handling, braking, the way it will break traction in any gear at high rpm, 500 RWHP with correct gearing was enough to, when you forget yourself (and I am in no way condoning such activity), drop a 150 kilometre an hour drift across four lanes of deserted highway in fourth. It will proabably be a pig to drive in normal traffic and use more fuel than you could pump into it. It wouldn't be pleasant is all I am saying. I take it you know this and have considered buying a daily driver? Other than that good luck! Hope it goes smoothly.

What an arsehole! Did you get his numberplate?